linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v13 00/11] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default hierarchy

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <89b64577-f20e-47d8-03a6-c047e5107271@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Oct 2018 13:04:21 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:     Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...com, pjt@...gle.com, luto@...capital.net,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Patrick Bellasi <patrick.bellasi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 00/11] cpuset: Enable cpuset controller in default
 hierarchy

On 10/15/2018 12:35 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Waiman.
>
> This looks great to me.  I have only one small nit in terms of
> interface.  Currently, cpuset.partition file uses -1, 0, 1; however,
> given that this is consistent with how cgroup.type behaves (something
> can be set but may be invalid), I wonder whether using a similar
> syntax would be more consistent.  e.g. sth like cpuset.type which
> takes "normal" or "partition" and shows one of "normal", "partition"
> and "partition invalid".  I'd be perfectly happy with that being a
> follow-up patch.

Sure. I can send a follow-up patch to add that.
> Peter, does the patchset look good to you?  It does everything we want
> it to in terms of sched domain partitioning and is compliant all
> cgroup2 conventions.  If so, I'll apply the series to the cgroup devel
> branch.
>
> Thank you very much for the work and persistence!
>
Thanks for the comment. There is a minor bug in patch 3 because of the 2
possibilities of how cpumask_var_t can be defined. I will send updated
version of that patch to fix that.

-Longman